FINANCIAL PLAN AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT FOR FTIPS AND FSTIP FINANCIAL PLAN AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS 2013 FTIP/FSTIP WORKSHOP January 17, 2012 Wade Hobbs,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Transportation Conformity Basics. What is Transportation Conformity? Transportation conformity (conformity) is a way to ensure that Federal funding and.
Advertisements

Joint Task Force on Local Effort Assistance Staff Presentation June 13, 2002 Bryon Moore, Senate Ways and Means Committee Staff Denise Graham, House Appropriations.
Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Update August 24, 2006.
Capital Investment Program Listening Session Presented at APTA Annual Meeting -- 10/03/2012 RailVolution /14/
Proposed University Building Fund (UBF). These are possible purposes: Preserve investment in facility and infrastructure assets Establish a mechanism.
1 How to Succeed in Statewide and MPO Transportation Planning.
Nicholas Finch Local Programs Engineer Federal Highway Administration Preview of Federal-aid 101 Authorization Overview: Where we are! Where are we headed?
Tribal Transit Program August 9, 2013 State Programs Meeting Presented By Élan Flippin, FTA.
AN OVERVIEW OF CSU FUNDS Rodney Rideau Director of the Budget, California State University Franz Lozano, Director/Budget Officer, San Francisco State University.
THE PRESIDENT’S FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST Federal Transit Administration.
Local Assistance Federal-Aid Funds John Flores Division of Local Assistance Office of Resource Management and STIP Subvention Management Branch (916)
Doug Brown October 23, Budget Overview A Budget Planning Process (Overland Park’s) Financial Management.
Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) edgar.html.
Fiscal Years Outlook Preliminary Six-Year Financial Plan and Six-Year Improvement Plan Strategy John W. Lawson, Chief Financial Officer Reta.
2015 FTIP/FSTIP Workshop Transportation Conformity Wade Hobbs FHWA CADO January 15, 2014.
Chapter 3 Budget Structures and Institutions
2012 FTIP/FSTIP Workshop Project Selection Process.
FY 2012 President’s Budget Released February 14, 2011.
Joint Task Force on Local Effort Assistance September 25, 2002 Bill Freund, Consultant To The Task Force.
Ed Christopher Resource Center Planning Team Federal Highway Administration 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive Matteson, IL 60443
Highway Program Financing July Michigan Allocations Federal Law + State Law + Michigan Policy = MDOT & Local Allocations of Federal Apportionment.
Ron Hall Tribal Technical Assistance Program Colorado State University
Govt. Reporting - 1 GOVERNMENTAL REPORTING City Council Budgetary Hearing.
Module X: Cooperative Revenue Forecasting. Federal Requirements “For the purpose of developing the metropolitan transportation plan, the MPO, public transportation.
Structure of Presentation Federal Requirement Methodology WMATA Expenditures and Core Capacity Constraint Draft Revenues and Expenditures for 2015 – 2040.
Wyoming State Budget: Using the Past to Inform the Future Prepared by LSO Research Staff October 12, IP001R.
Introduction to the Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process MPO 101 Michigan Transportation Planning Association 35 th Annual Conference July 14,
SBIR Budgeting Leanne Robey Chief, Special Reviews Branch, NIH.
Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville 1 Process Development and Integration for the Six-Year Program.
1 Implementation of the Traditional Community Disaster Loan (CDL) Program.
Financial Planning Session E-1 The Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process.
INTRODUCTION TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING AND ELIGIBILITY Steve Baumann Financial Specialist (503) Mike Morrow(Field Operations Engineer) Mike.
May 21, 2008 Bringing Transit Planning to the MPO Planning Table Bringing Transit Planning To The MPO Planning Table Daniel Rudge.
Third Party In-Kind Contributions as Match for FHWA Planning Funds Michigan Transportation Planning Association Conference Flint, Michigan July 15, 2011.
Region Three Pilot “Virtual” Consolidation. Consolidation Legislation and Guidance Title I Schoolwide Fiscal Guidance issued February, 2008 [Section E]
Consulting with Idaho Tribes in Planning Transportation Development 14 th Annual NW Tribal Transportation Symposium Patti Raino, ITD.
Local Pots of Gold Local Pots of Gold Maintaining Fiscal Constraint for Local Funds in the TIP Srikalyani Srinivasan Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Introduction to the Tribal Child Support Enforcement Program.
Freight Project Financing Challenges, Questions and Options presented by Michael P. Huerta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. April 30, 2001.
Who Does What Susan Handy TTP282 October Players Government Industry Citizens/ Consumers.
AASHTO ANNUAL MEETING STANDING COMMITTEE ON PLANNING BILOXI, MS OCTOBER 30, 2010 Potential Changes to STAA Planning Process and Performance Measurement.
IFTA Annual Business Meeting Virginia Beach, VA August 17, 2011 Federal Highway Administration.
Marriott Financial Center New York April 25, 2006 Pre-Rulemaking Public Meetings.
Title I Part A: Back to Basics ESEA Odyssey Fall 2010.
GASB Statement No. 54 Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions KASBO SESSION FALL 2010.
Health Resources and Services Administration HIV/AIDS Bureau Policy Clarification Notices 15-03: Clarification Regarding the RWHAP and Program Income and.
“SPEAR” W ORKSHOP O CTOBER 19 & 30, 2015 ANGELLE GOMEZ S UBAWARD R ISK A SSESSMENT / MONITORING.
The Kern Regional Transportation Plan A Vision and Guidebook for Kern County in 2025.
Federal-Aid Funding County Highway Accountants Conference May 10, 2007 zpowerpoint/ProjManagersCriticalIssuesBOB Feb07.ppt.
Division of Budgets January 25, 2012 Budget and Allocation Capacity Update Presented to the California Transportation Commission Tab 13.
Air Quality, Transportation Conformity, and the FSTIP FTIP/FSTIP Workshop February 9, 2016.
1 Section 5310: Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities Program U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration SAFETEA-LU.
BASIC BUDGET CONCEPTS By Kenneth Kelly June 2008.
Federal Transportation Improvement Programs Financial Planning and Financial Constraint 2017 FSTIP Workshop Wade Hobbs, FHWA CADO February 9-10, 2016.
HANDOUT 2017 FSTIP Development Workshop Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Requirements Wade Hobbs Federal Highway Administration California.
A Brief Introduction to the IMF
Statement No. 54: Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions 2011 City Managers’ Association of Oklahoma Mini-Conference The views expressed.
OMB Circular A-122 and the Federal Cost Principles Copyright © Texas Education Agency
Copyright © Texas Education Agency Accounting for Grant Funds, including Documentation for Expenditures.
PROJECT SELECTION & EXPEDITED PROJECT SELECTION FOR MPO FTIPS AND THE STATEWIDE FSTIP 2013 FTIP/FSTIP WORKSHOP January 18-19, 2012 Wade Hobbs, FHWA CADO.
A risk assessment is the process of identifying potential hazards an organization may face and analyzing methods of response if exposure occurs.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROCEDURES FOR REVISIONS STATEWIDE AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS (STIP & TIP) State of Alabama Department.
Funding Tools for Contract Education. Not should. Can or cannot, there is no should.
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Financial Planning and Fiscal Constraint Requirement MAG Regional Council February 24, 2010.
TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY
The Administration of Subrecipient Agreements
BOT LAW (R.A. No. 6957, as amended by R.A. No. 7718)
NC RPO Meeting July 25, 2018.
Capital Improvement Plans
Presentation transcript:

FINANCIAL PLAN AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT FOR FTIPS AND FSTIP FINANCIAL PLAN AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS 2013 FTIP/FSTIP WORKSHOP January 17, 2012 Wade Hobbs, FHWA CADO

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions FINANCIAL PLAN  The TIP shall include a financial plan that:  Demonstrates how the TIP can be implemented;  Indicates resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be available to carry out the program;  Identifies innovative financing techniques to finance projects, programs, and strategies; and  May include, for illustrative purposes, additional projects that would be included in the approved TIP if reasonable additional resources beyond those identified in the financial plan were available. 23 USC 134(j)(B)

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT  Financially constrained or Fiscal constraint means that the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP includes sufficient financial information for demonstrating that projects in the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP can be implemented using committed, available, or reasonably available revenue sources, with reasonable assurance that the federally supported transportation system is being adequately operated and maintained.  For the TIP and the STIP, financial constraint/fiscal constraint applies to each program year. Financial constraint… shall be demonstrated and maintained by year and shall include sufficient financial information to demonstrate which projects are to be implemented using current and/or reasonably available revenues, while federally- supported facilities are being adequately operated and maintained.(23 CFR (m))  For the TIP and the STIP, financial constraint/fiscal constraint applies to each category of Federal-aid funds. Fiscal constraint must be demonstrated by program year for the individual categories of Federal-aid funds.  Funds must be available or committed for those FTIP projects listed in the first two years of the TIP in nonattainment and maintenance areas for AQ NAAQS. Projects in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas can be included in the first two years of the TIP and STIP only if funds are “available” or “committed.”  Total State and Federal Funding in the FTIP/FSTIP. The cumulative total of the State and Federal funds in the TIPs and FSTIP should not exceed, on an annual basis, the total State and Federal funds reasonably available to the State.

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions REASONABLY AVAILABLE FUNDS Available and Committed Funds  Available Funds - Available funds means funds derived from an existing source dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes. ( 23 CFR )  For Federal funds, authorized and/or appropriated funds and the extrapolation of formula and discretionary funds at historic rates of increase are considered “available.” A similar approach may be used for State and local funds that are dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes.  Special Situation for an FTIP/FSTIP horizon beyond the funding authorization period - When the horizon year for the FTIP/FSTIP period extends beyond the current authorization period for federal program funds, “available” funds may include an extrapolation based on historic authorizations of those Federal funds that are distributed by formula.

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions REASONABLY AVAILABLE FUNDS Available and Committed Funds  Committed Funds - Committed funds means funds that have been dedicated or obligated for transportation purposes. ( 23 CFR )  For State funds that are not dedicated to transportation purposes, only those funds over which the Governor has control may be considered “committed.” Approval of a TIP by the Governor is considered a commitment of those funds over which the Governor has control.  For local or private sources of funds not dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes (including donations of property), a commitment in writing (e.g., letter of intent) by the responsible official or body having control of the funds may be considered a commitment.  For projects involving 49 U.S.C funding, execution of a Full Funding Grant Agreement (or equivalent) or a Project Construction Grant Agreement with the USDOT shall be considered a multi-year commitment of Federal funds.

New Funding Sources  New Funding Sources - New funding sources are defined as revenues that do not currently exist or that may require additional actions before the State DOT, MPO, or public transportation operator can commit such funding to transportation projects.  Reasonably available condition required for Inclusion in FTIP/FSTIP - The FTIP and FSTIP may take into account new funding sources and levels of funding not currently in place, but which are "reasonably expected to be available" [see 23 CFR (m), 23 CFR (f)(10)(ii), and 23 CFR (h), respectively]. Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions REASONABLY AVAILABLE FUNDS

New Funding Sources (Continued)  Judgment Required to Determine what is Reasonable - Determining whether a future funding source is “reasonable” is a judgment decision.  Evidence of Review and Support is Necessary - To be considered "reasonable," the financial information and financial plans that accompany the TIP, STIP, and metropolitan transportation plan must identify strategies for ensuring the availability of these new revenue sources in the years when they are needed for project development and implementation [see 23 CFR (m) and 23 CFR (h)].  Future Revenues Projected from Historic Trends - Future revenues may be projected based on historic trends, including consideration of past legislative or executive actions.  Federal Discretionary Program Funds - For Federal funds distributed on a discretionary basis, any funding beyond that currently authorized and targeted to the area may be considered as reasonably available, provided past history supports such funding levels.

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions FUNDS NOT REASONABLY AVAILABLE Funds Not Reasonably Available  Example 1: New funds from a ballot initiative where this is a strong likelihood, or history, of defeat. Assuming new funds from an upcoming Statewide, regional, or local ballot initiative would not be reasonable if polls indicate a strong likelihood of defeat or there is a history of repeated defeat of similar ballot initiatives in recent years.  Example 2: 25 percent increase in gas tax revenues over five years when the growth over the previous five years was only 15 percent. A 25 percent increase in gas tax revenues over five years is not reasonable if the growth over the previous five years was only 15 percent.  Example 3: One MPO will receive federal discretionary program funding for multiple large-scale transportation projects. An assumption that a single metropolitan area will receive funding for multiple large-scale transportation projects under a federal discretionary program (e.g., FTA's New Starts) is not reasonable if the assumption would result in that one metropolitan area receiving a disproportionately high percentage of the total national program dollars.

Financial Plan and Revenue Assumptions Apportionments and Programming Capacity  Apportionment – Apportionment means the distribution of funds as prescribed by statutory formula. Apportionments are part of the Federal-aid Highway Program (FAHP) financing cycle and provide the means of distributing the funding authorized in the surface transportation authorizing legislation, such as SAFETEA-LU, in accord with a prescribed statutory formula.  Obligation – Obligation means The Federal government’s legal commitment to pay or reimburse the States or other entities for the Federal share of a project’s eligible costs.  Obligation Limitation – Obligation Limitation is a restriction or ceiling on the amount of Federal assistance that may be promised (obligated) during a specified time period. This is a statutory budgetary control that does not affect the apportionment or allocation of funds. Rather, it controls the rate at which these funds may be used.  Obligation Authority – Obligation authority means the total amount of funds that may be obligated in a year. For the Federal-aid Highway Program this is comprised of the obligation limitation amount plus amounts for programs exempt from the limitation (e.g. emergency relief).  Unobligated Balance - Unobligated balance means the portion of the funds apportioned by the Federal agency that has not been obligated by the grantee. The balance is determined by deducting the unexpired or un-lapsed cumulative obligations from the cumulative funds authorized.  Programming Capacity – Programming capacity has no specific meaning with regard to the Federal-aid highway program and is not used or defined by Federal Highway administered statute, regulation or policy.

Financial Plan and Financial Constraint for FTIPs and FSTIP For More Information on Financial Planning and Financial Constraint: